Is Donaghy really 15-2 at picking playoff games due to refs?

[Reality]

He just weighed in on Gm 3.

Westkoast, not sure if hTe Laker House has threatened banning for any of you who look at or listen to what Donaghy is reviewing but you, Laker Fan, Hidey, msc and any others that are still around should go ahead and read.  He gives many accounts of blown calls favoring Boston.  Balanced review.

[westkoast]

He just weighed in on Gm 3.

Westkoast, not sure if hTe Laker House has threatened banning for any of you who look at or listen to what Donaghy is reviewing but you, Laker Fan, Hidey, msc and any others that are still around should go ahead and read.  He gives many accounts of blown calls favoring Boston.  Balanced review.

Look Reality, I don't think its neccessary to read comments about NBA refs favoring home teams.  I think that is pretty well known by now.  It ranks up there with telling the world that Derek Fisher flops ala Doc Rivers

[Reality]

Swing and a complete miss.
As if that's all that Donaghy touched on.
I thought I'd give you the benefit of the doubt.  Can't leave, or even step out for a moment from Krishna, got it.

[westkoast]

I thought I'd give you the benefit of the doubt.  Can't leave, or even step out for a moment from Krishna, got it.

The irony.

You danced around the FT  shooting points and debate like a ballerina.  Let me know why it is okay for you to dance around debates but if someone doesn't want to bother reading that Boston, the home team, got more calls in their favor they 'cant even step out for a moment' LOL.

[Reality]

^^ 2nd time responding.
Reality

# of FTs is hardly the sole indicator of # of bogus calls.  That's basketball 101.
Non shooting fouls, etc.
Read the article.

[Reality]

You know, this is exactly what the NBA didn't want - Donaghy coming out reviewing games afterward, each time, building upon the idea that the series may be decided so as to make for good drama rather than fair basketball.

What happens when one of the TV networks picks up Donaghy?

Stern promised us more transparency.  We haven't gotten it from him.  That's a hanging curveball for Donaghy.

Fact is that at this point, Donaghy makes for commentary for people who like watching train wrecks.  Those who believe him can watch the NBA, listen to Donaghy, and say, "See?", and those who don't will just ignore what he's saying.  At this point, you have to ask if Donaghy might have found a way to cash in on what many have believed for a long time - that the officiating isn't just bad, it's corrupt.

And one has to wonder if the interest outweighs the cost.  Has the NBA just decided to go the conception that the refs are crooked?  Say nothing, comment no more, and let the chips fall where they may?

The Donaghy storm caused *FAR* *TOO* *LITTLE* real change for a revelation of its magnitude.  That, to me, indicates there's more truth to what he said than some have given him credit for.

Concur, it's only obvious right Joe?

Now you've got some potentially crucial ref game story lines unfolding for 5, 6 and if nec 7.  (or will Gm 7 be made *neccessary*?    ) 
Bynums injury may or may not render him hindered for one or all of the games.  If he is, this is to Bostons advantage because Bynums length has given Boston problems Joe, irregardless of how you and others may view Bynums averageness.  If so, will a *counter attack* be ordered in that Perkins is T'd up again so as remove him from not only the game but the series?  Now bear in mind most of Perkins T's may have been deserved, but when you have W.O.W. saying one of Perkins Ts was completely bogus, well you get the picture.  Even if it was overturned.  (Of course that T that W.O.W. called undeserved was not vs the Lakers.)  Sheed on the other hand is a moron but nonetheless some of his Ts are very undeserved.  Will he also get a bogus T to switch the frontline advantage should Bynum be out?

Derek Fisher finally being fairly rung up for the holding and grabbing he does vs larger guards he cannot defend crossing the court to get open (Ray Allen and virtually every other guard he defends) was a game changer.  He also did not get his usual faggy flop calls in Gm 4 after Doc complained.  Or did Docs complaining have a thing to do with it? 
Either way Allen was a bricklayer in Gm 3, the 0-13 fiasco.  But this being called -or not, will continue to be a game changer.

Donaghy points out many calls that went against the Lakers, thus it's too bad the Laker posters are not allowed to view his balanced reviews since they will face Laker House membership banishment.  Joe have read any of Donaghys reviews and compared with what you saw?

[Joe Vancil]

What little I've actually watched, I felt that Boston was put at an extreme disadvantage in game 1, and LA was put at an extreme disadvantage in game 2.  I felt that the calls weren't the same on both ends of the court.  I didn't watch game 3, and saw only a bit of Game 4 (and didn't really have anything bad to say about the couple of minutes I saw).

I felt Bryant in particular got jobbed in game 2, and I felt that Boston as a whole got jobbed in game 1, but especially the folks guarding Kobe in the opening quarter.

I believe that if you call the game correctly - which means get rid of all these "make-up" calls, get rid of all the "superstar" calls - you call a fair game, and that favors the best players.  It's those of us with less ability that have to try to get away with stuff - real players can actually do real damage.  And I think the NBA has done a poor job realizing that fact.

As it stands, I think either team can make a case that they've been jobbed by the refs out of a 3-1 lead.  So that makes it even, right?  To my line of thinking, NO.  It makes the result tainted, no matter the outcome.  And, yes, I know I should be used to that by now, but come on!  I honestly believe the college refs are better.  And as bad as I think the Olympic refs are - and believe me, they're HIDEOUS - I at least believe they're FAIR.

I've got no idea who's going to win this series, but I honestly think that it may very well come down to the refereeing.  And that's a sad statement, because this series is *CLOSE*.  (If I have to call it, I'm calling the Lakers, because I believe their top two (Bryant/Gasol) are better than Boston's top two (Garnett/Allen).)

[Reality]

What little I've actually watched, I felt that Boston was put at an extreme disadvantage in game 1, and LA was put at an extreme disadvantage in game 2.  I felt that the calls weren't the same on both ends of the court.  I didn't watch game 3, and saw only a bit of Game 4 (and didn't really have anything bad to say about the couple of minutes I saw).

I felt Bryant in particular got jobbed in game 2, and I felt that Boston as a whole got jobbed in game 1, but especially the folks guarding Kobe in the opening quarter.

I believe that if you call the game correctly - which means get rid of all these "make-up" calls, get rid of all the "superstar" calls - you call a fair game, and that favors the best players.  It's those of us with less ability that have to try to get away with stuff - real players can actually do real damage.  And I think the NBA has done a poor job realizing that fact.

As it stands, I think either team can make a case that they've been jobbed by the refs out of a 3-1 lead.  So that makes it even, right?  To my line of thinking, NO.  It makes the result tainted, no matter the outcome.  And, yes, I know I should be used to that by now, but come on!  I honestly believe the college refs are better.  And as bad as I think the Olympic refs are - and believe me, they're HIDEOUS - I at least believe they're FAIR.

I've got no idea who's going to win this series, but I honestly think that it may very well come down to the refereeing.  And that's a sad statement, because this series is *CLOSE*.  (If I have to call it, I'm calling the Lakers, because I believe their top two (Bryant/Gasol) are better than Boston's top two (Garnett/Allen).)

Gm general consensus among reasonable realists is LA advantage again, altho plenty of blown calls went against LA.  Donaghys review of 3 was "Just When You Thought It Couldn't Get Worse ..."

Concur 100% Joe, the refs are not done and may well still decide who wins this series.  And concur that it's already tainted, no matter the outcome.

[Joe Vancil]

What little I've actually watched, I felt that Boston was put at an extreme disadvantage in game 1, and LA was put at an extreme disadvantage in game 2.  I felt that the calls weren't the same on both ends of the court.  I didn't watch game 3, and saw only a bit of Game 4 (and didn't really have anything bad to say about the couple of minutes I saw).

I felt Bryant in particular got jobbed in game 2, and I felt that Boston as a whole got jobbed in game 1, but especially the folks guarding Kobe in the opening quarter.

I believe that if you call the game correctly - which means get rid of all these "make-up" calls, get rid of all the "superstar" calls - you call a fair game, and that favors the best players.  It's those of us with less ability that have to try to get away with stuff - real players can actually do real damage.  And I think the NBA has done a poor job realizing that fact.

As it stands, I think either team can make a case that they've been jobbed by the refs out of a 3-1 lead.  So that makes it even, right?  To my line of thinking, NO.  It makes the result tainted, no matter the outcome.  And, yes, I know I should be used to that by now, but come on!  I honestly believe the college refs are better.  And as bad as I think the Olympic refs are - and believe me, they're HIDEOUS - I at least believe they're FAIR.

I've got no idea who's going to win this series, but I honestly think that it may very well come down to the refereeing.  And that's a sad statement, because this series is *CLOSE*.  (If I have to call it, I'm calling the Lakers, because I believe their top two (Bryant/Gasol) are better than Boston's top two (Garnett/Allen).)

Gm general consensus among reasonable realists is LA advantage again, altho plenty of blown calls went against LA.  Donaghys review of 3 was "Just When You Thought It Couldn't Get Worse ..."

Concur 100% Joe, the refs are not done and may well still decide who wins this series.  And concur that it's already tainted, no matter the outcome.

I can't honestly call it "Advantage LA," especially after last night's game.  I think both teams have a real right to be *H* *O* *T* about the refereeing.

I felt Boston got away with a lot in holding that lead in the late third and early fourth.  If that gets called even reasonably consistent with what gets called in a lot of cases, LA may erase that lead.  But LA got a few breaks late, and one of the more egregious ones I saw actually DIDN'T get called.

NBA refereeing is runing the game.

[rickortreat]

NBA referee's have been consistently bad for years, but when I see how the officials in other sports are, I think they're the best at getting the calls right. It's just that with all the video tools we have now we can SEE how bad they are, but recognize that they have to make more calls per minute than in any other sport! They are human and they do make mistakes and they also get angry at the players which causes biased officiating.

Donaghy analyzing the game after the fact is garbage.  If there's a bias, then Donaghy should be able to know the outcome BEFOREHAND.

In other words, it's not really a conspiracy for or against anyone, the refs are doing as well as they can, and the more they rely on video replay the more correct the calls will be. I think you'd have to be a saint to not take certain things personally, and if  player flips you off 'cause he mouths off looking all wild-eyed like Rasheed Wallace, you're going to want to give him a technical and you'll feel good about doing it. 

If the refs are altering the outcome of a game,. it's because a player or a group of players are pissing them off, there is no conspiracy. When a player questions a call, he's questioning your integrity. Hardly any player admits that they fouled the other player. They all throw up their hands in protest and put a sad look on their face and say, "who me!?" when the replay shows that he has the other player wrapped in a bear hug!  I have yet to see a ref give a player a technical foul for flopping, but isn't that the epitome of unsportsmanlike conduct?  The rules of the game demand respect, and trying to get the officials to call something on the other player shows a lack of respect for the game.

If anything, I think the onus is on the players to be more respectful of the game and more honest. Maybe if players were thrown out for flopping, or given a technical for throwing up the ball after a whistle to get a shooting foul, the game would be played more cleanly. After all, the refs can't call a foul if there isn't one!  The easiest game for a ref is one where all they do is see a game where there are no fouls.

[Joe Vancil]

NBA referee's have been consistently bad for years, but when I see how the officials in other sports are, I think they're the best at getting the calls right. It's just that with all the video tools we have now we can SEE how bad they are, but recognize that they have to make more calls per minute than in any other sport! They are human and they do make mistakes and they also get angry at the players which causes biased officiating.

That's like saying our government is doing good because no one else is doing better.  It's an argument that detracts from trust because of inattention to results, which is an ultimate failure of a team.

Donaghy analyzing the game after the fact is garbage.  If there's a bias, then Donaghy should be able to know the outcome BEFOREHAND.

Only if you're assuming Donaghy has access to all in-league communication.  It's like saying that the reporters should have been able to tell us about Watergate before it happened. 

You're assuming Donaghy is crooked now because he was crooked before.  I'm assuming that he has some insight as to how the league works, and that his current "crookedness" is not determined.

In other words, it's not really a conspiracy for or against anyone, the refs are doing as well as they can, and the more they rely on video replay the more correct the calls will be. I think you'd have to be a saint to not take certain things personally, and if  player flips you off 'cause he mouths off looking all wild-eyed like Rasheed Wallace, you're going to want to give him a technical and you'll feel good about doing it. 

If the refs are altering the outcome of a game,. it's because a player or a group of players are pissing them off, there is no conspiracy.

Disagree with you to this point.

When a player questions a call, he's questioning your integrity. Hardly any player admits that they fouled the other player. They all throw up their hands in protest and put a sad look on their face and say, "who me!?" when the replay shows that he has the other player wrapped in a bear hug!  I have yet to see a ref give a player a technical foul for flopping, but isn't that the epitome of unsportsmanlike conduct?  The rules of the game demand respect, and trying to get the officials to call something on the other player shows a lack of respect for the game.

If anything, I think the onus is on the players to be more respectful of the game and more honest. Maybe if players were thrown out for flopping, or given a technical for throwing up the ball after a whistle to get a shooting foul, the game would be played more cleanly. After all, the refs can't call a foul if there isn't one!  The easiest game for a ref is one where all they do is see a game where there are no fouls.

This is 100% on target, and is a major failure by the players.  There's no question that they're trying to "game" the system.  I just also believe that the system is being defined so that it is capable of being "gamed" as well.

[JoMal]

Overall, I think this topic is not going to ever to satisfactorily resolved, but Donaghy was interviewed by our local sports radio station this morning about his latest allegations and he said one thing that kind of struck home with me.

He was being asked about how the League might try to influence the outcome of games, to extend a series for ratings boosts, for instance and how that might happen. Donaghy said that before every game, the League has a meeting with the game refs and goes over specific things to look for and how to literally call the game in certain situations.

Donaghy admitted that it was these meetings prior to the games that he used as his source on his game betting. He would often leave these meetings and go straight to his bookie to place his bets.

[westkoast]

Overall, I think this topic is not going to ever to satisfactorily resolved, but Donaghy was interviewed by our local sports radio station this morning about his latest allegations and he said one thing that kind of struck home with me.

He was being asked about how the League might try to influence the outcome of games, to extend a series for ratings boosts, for instance and how that might happen. Donaghy said that before every game, the League has a meeting with the game refs and goes over specific things to look for and how to literally call the game in certain situations.

Donaghy admitted that it was these meetings prior to the games that he used as his source on his game betting. He would often leave these meetings and go straight to his bookie to place his bets.

While it does sound like a fishy statement at the same time, depending on how you look at it, that is part of their job.  Not the part of influencing or extending games.  The part where they make adjustments to how they are not calling say 3 seconds (which they haven't in this series at all really) or the way post defensive players are using their shoulders to impede the offensive post player.  I think that just like the players and coaches there are things the refs can improve on in a series.  Teams tend to play a certain way so the refs can get a feel for pet 'veteran moves' or may notice an offensive player carries the ball a lot coming off screens.

Even all of us knew that after Doc RIvers made comments about Fisher flopping he wasn't going to get the same calls in the next game.  Is that insider information or has the league got so bad even fans can call it?  The home teams have won most of their games at home.  Knowing one team has a 55% of better chance of winning just based on that is good information to bet on.  A gambler would take those odds any day and not necessarily even need to throw a game or have a buddy ref throw a game.

I don't know if anyone on this board actively bets on basketball games but it is not all that easy to manipulate points per quarter or for an overall game.  While Vegas is good about setting lines with the way the game goes and players getting hot/cold it fluctuates real fast.  In a way not even a ref can make up for.

[JoMal]

The point that Donaghy was making, 'coast, is that refs can easily alter games in favor of one team over the other simply by calling certain infractions that probably happen on every possession more for one team and not so much for the other.

He admitted that in the League meetings before playoff games they all essentially discussed the tendancies of certain players to do something that maybe the refs ignore during the season, but are told to call attention to in the playoffs, so they will start calling it. They did this to Yao Ming regarding the way he sets screens. Donaghy was told to watch his feet and sure enough, several years back, Yao suddenly could not set a legal screen in the playoffs.

Donaghy made some money on that one.     

[westkoast]

The point that Donaghy was making, 'coast, is that refs can easily alter games in favor of one team over the other simply by calling certain infractions that probably happen on every possession more for one team and not so much for the other.

He admitted that in the League meetings before playoff games they all essentially discussed the tendancies of certain players to do something that maybe the refs ignore during the season, but are told to call attention to in the playoffs, so they will start calling it. They did this to Yao Ming regarding the way he sets screens. Donaghy was told to watch his feet and sure enough, several years back, Yao suddenly could not set a legal screen in the playoffs.

Donaghy made some money on that one.     

While I cannot argue against if the refs do this for their own benefit or the leagues benefit,  for obvious reasons, is that not the correct thing to do regarding Yao Ming?  He was setting very bad, illegal screens on a consistent basis.  He has too large to get set before ball handlers were already making their move.  I think it would be fair for the refs to stop calling Derek Fisher's neck launching, break wrenching moves around screens as offensive fouls after going back after game 5 and looking at the tape for the same reason.  It is the players job to make the adjustment if they are doing something wrong.  It is also up to the coach to stop running plays that would put that player in that position.

To me the one solution to what you find is a problem is for them not to discuss games at all.  Just to start with a clean slate every time.  I think that could work but it wouldn't make fans happy.  If they didn't discuss Derek Fisher's acting around screens after seeing him do it on a consistent basis in tape they might not have made the adjustment.  That would make fans just as angry as the reverse.